Metabolic Clauses in the Constitution
Protecting Drex, Climate and Zero Waste as Common Heritage

First-Person Consciousness — Brain Bee

“My body was born with a metabolic constitution. The State still wasn’t.”

When I was just an egg, there was no salary, GDP, dollar, inflation or Drex.
There was only metabolism:

• nutrients arriving through the placenta,
  
  

• oxygen coming in, carbon dioxide going out,
  
  

• waste being eliminated,
  
  

• a whole organism organising itself to stay alive.
  
  

My “internal State” already worked with rigid metabolic clauses:
if oxygen drops too much, I suffer;
if metabolic waste accumulates, I get sick;
if energy doesn’t arrive, development stops.

In my pre-linguistic life I couldn’t say “fundamental rights”,
but my body already knew what it means to:

• be welcomed or discarded,
  
  

• be nourished or neglected,
  
  

• be seen as part of a we, or as a burden.
  
  

My Damasian Mind (interoception + proprioception) formed exactly like that:
learning the invisible rules that decide who has the right to exist in peace
and who lives in the constant tension of “something is missing”.

In digital adolescence, the game became more aggressive.
Social networks began to colonise my metabolism:

• cheap dopamine in exchange for attention,
  
  

• consumption as the main language of belonging,
  
  

• chronic anxiety as the background noise of daily life.
  
  

Blind faith in leaders, influencers and ideologies started competing for control over my body,
often pushing me into Zone 3 –
a state in which attention is hijacked and my “I” becomes a mere reactor to other people’s narratives.

Then the penny dropped:

I have a very sophisticated biological constitution,
but I live in a State that still doesn’t take itself seriously as a metabolic organism.

If my body has clauses to protect oxygen, energy and waste removal,
why doesn’t the Brazilian Constitution explicitly have
metabolic clauses that guarantee:

• a Drex Citizen as minimum metabolic income,
  
  

• a stable climate as a condition for survival,
  
  

• a Zero Waste Brazil as basic hygiene of the territorial body?
  
  

This is what I call here Metabolic Clauses in the Constitution.

1. From “environment” to social metabolism

The 1988 Constitution already made a decisive move in Article 225,
by stating that everyone has the right to an ecologically balanced environment,
as a common good of the people and essential to a healthy quality of life,
and that the State and the community have the duty to defend and preserve it
for present and future generations.

In practice, that is already a kind of metabolic clause:

• it recognises environment as common heritage,
  
  

• it distributes obligations between State and society,
  
  

• it links everything to present and future generations.
  
  

Recent case law by the Brazilian Supreme Court has deepened this reading,
recognising, for example, that the State has a constitutional duty
to make the Climate Fund truly operate and be funded,
given the link between Article 225, international climate treaties
and the duty to protect a stable climate for the future.

At the same time, cases like the “Six Youths” climate lawsuit against the federal government
put at the centre the right to serious climate targets,
coherent with the Constitution and with the principle of non-regression in environmental law.

In other words: Brazil is already, in practice, constitutionalising climate metabolism.
What is missing is taking the next step and saying it clearly:

We are not talking only about “environment”,
but about social metabolism –
flows of energy, materials, carbon and money
that decide who can live with dignity
and who is pushed to the metabolic periphery of the State.

2. Drex Citizen as metabolic income, not charity

In my vocabulary, the JIWASA citizen is the basic unit of the State.
Not a government client, not a beggar of social programmes.
They are co-owner of the State’s metabolism.

That is why, when I talk about Drex Citizen, I am not talking about “minimum income”:

• it is not charity,
  
  

• not government favour,
  
  

• not electoral marketing.
  
  

It is metabolic income:
the share of the monetary flow that the State itself creates and manages,
recognising that no organism functions
without a guaranteed minimum of energy.

Recent literature on central bank digital currencies (CBDC) shows how a public digital currency
can be designed as a new form of public money,
reorganising basic economic rights and expanding monetary sovereignty for the people.

What I propose is that the Brazilian Constitution:

1. Recognise Drex as public monetary infrastructure,
   aimed at inclusion and metabolic stability of the social body;
   
   

2. Establish a metabolic income clause,
   guaranteeing every JIWASA citizen a daily metabolic minimum,
   paid in Drex, that allows them to:
   
   

• say “no” to extreme exploitation,
  
  

• escape predatory jobs and debt traps,
  
  

• participate in political life without being hostage to hunger and absolute urgency.
  
  

This is not “minimum income” as a band-aid,
but the recognition of metabolic income as common heritage,
just as Article 225 recognises the environment as a common good.

3. Stable climate and Zero Waste as constitutional hygiene

If Drex provides minimum energy,
climate and waste have to do with hygiene of the planetary body.

Climate-constitutional debates around the world are showing
how more and more countries include explicit climate rights and duties
in their constitutions,
trying to align State structures with the gravity of the climate crisis.

In Brazil, the Supreme Court has already recognised the centrality of climate protection,
interpreting Article 225 as a basis for demanding
the implementation of real environmental and climate policies,
as in cases about the Climate Fund and deforestation.

But we still lack a clear metabolic formulation. I would summarise it as:

1. Stable Climate Clause
   
   

• make explicit that the right to an ecologically balanced environment
  includes the right to a stable climate as a basic condition
  for agriculture, health, housing and water security;
  
  

• link this right to minimum standards for decarbonisation
  and biome protection, with clear non-regression parameters.
  
  

2. Zero Waste / Materials Metabolism Clause
   
   

• recognise that the State has a duty to organise
  a circular materials metabolism,
  reducing waste, landfilling and pollution;
  
  

• tie municipalities and regional consortia to Brazil Zero Waste 2040 targets,
  integrated into the budget and into industrial policy.
  
  

Again, this is not just “environmental policy”:
it is metabolism — who breathes what,
who lives on top of dumps,
who drinks clean or contaminated water,
who profits from extraction and who pays the bill in their body.

4. Metabolic clauses and the fight against State capture

From a neuroscientific point of view, I know that:

• my brain needs Zone 2 to think critically and empathetically;
  
  

• Zone 3, dominated by fear, anger and permanent urgency,
  is the ideal terrain for political and economic manipulation.
  
  

Today, social networks, marketing and part of the media
work precisely to keep me in Zone 3:

• distracted by scandals,
  
  

• polarised by artificial identities,
  
  

• consuming as anaesthesia for emptiness.
  
  

Meanwhile, a small minority –
the “01s” who live off the State and control information channels –
continues to run the real metabolism:

• the budget,
  
  

• tax incentives,
  
  

• tax waivers benefiting a few,
  
  

• environmental licensing being relaxed.
  
  

Metabolic clauses in the Constitution serve, then, at least two purposes:

1. Lock in a minimum metabolism for the JIWASA citizen,
   preventing every change of government from turning Drex Citizen, climate policy and Zero Waste
   into bargaining chips for lobbies or electoral marketing.
   
   

2. Expose the gap between discourse and practice,
   by allowing citizens, the Public Defender’s Office and the Public Prosecution Service
   to invoke the Constitution directly when there is:
   
   

• defunding of climate policy,
  
  

• roll-back on Zero Waste targets,
  
  

• attack on Drex infrastructure that guarantees minimum metabolic income.
  
  

This is a way of pulling social metabolism out of the shadows
and bringing it up to the level of constitutional text,
where disputes become more transparent
and where future generations can demand accountability based on explicit wording.

5. JIWASA writing its own metabolic constitution

As Brain Bee, I see it like this:

• Since the egg, my body has operated under non-negotiable metabolic clauses.
  
  

• The 1988 Constitution started to recognise this at the environmental level.
  
  

• Recent Supreme Court decisions already point towards a right to a stable climate
  and clearer State duties in this field.
  
  

Now the JIWASA step is missing:

To write into the Constitution that
public money (Drex), climate and materials
are part of one single social metabolism,
and that protecting them means protecting the common heritage
that every citizen co-owns.

When I talk about Metabolic Clauses, I’m proposing:

• that Drex Citizen be a right to metabolic income, not charity;
  
  

• that stable climate be an explicit fundamental right, not only implicit in legal interpretation;
  
  

• that Zero Waste be a constitutional target, not just a government programme.
  
  

And at the same time, I’m speaking to every teenager lost in the feeds
— including the teenager that still lives inside me:

You are not a customer of the State.
You are the JIWASA State.
The Constitution is not a distant book in Brasília;
it is the written form of your collective metabolism.

When we start writing Drex, climate and Zero Waste
as constitutional metabolic clauses,
we will be making a radical yet simple move:

• aligning political time with bodily time,
  
  

• protecting the future not as a promise,
  but as anticipated memory engraved in the State’s highest text.
  
  

Post-2020 References

(Constitution, climate, CBDC and social metabolism)

1. Cepparulo, A. (2024). Constitutionalizing the Fight Against Climate Change.
   
   

2. Nevitt, M. (2025). Constitutionalizing Climate Rights.
   
   

3. Davies, B. (2022). Constitutions, the Environment and Climate Change. International IDEA.
   
   

4. Ghaleigh, N. S. (2022). The Complexities of Comparative Climate Constitutionalism.
   
   

5. Tigre, M. A. (2023). Human Rights and Climate Change for Climate Litigation: The Brazilian Experience.
   
   

6. Landeira, F. P. (2025). Youth Protagonism in Latin American Climate Litigation.
   
   

7. Giotti, F. F. (2024). State Climate Litigation in Brazil. Revista ESMAT.
   
   

8. Rights-Based Climate Litigation in Brazil: An Assessment of Recent Cases. (2023). Journal of Human Rights Practice.
   
   

9. Skinner, C. P. (2024). Central Bank Digital Currency as New Public Money. University of Pennsylvania Law Review.
   
   

10. Miernicki, M. (2023). Cash, Accounts and Central Bank Digital Currencies: A Legal Perspective.
    
    

11. Bossu, W. et al. (2020). Legal Aspects of Central Bank Digital Currency. IMF Working Paper.
    
    

12. Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil (1988), especially Article 225 on the right to an ecologically balanced environment as a common good and a duty toward present and future generations.